Moral Distinctions

When we say ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’, it is difficult to know what people are thinking. We have Politicians willing screw over their own People and commit Genocide against the entire rest of the World, but they think themselves ‘Good’ when compared to a former President who is ‘Evil’ because he once relaxed with a young lady for a minute and a half against a context of 8 years of 24/7 Work. We need to de-trivialize ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’.

We should rather think in terms of ‘Civilized’ and ‘Barbarian’. A ‘Civilized’ attitude is one that is intent upon cooperation and sharing, where the welfare of the Entire Society becomes the central concern. Barbarism, however, is concerned with Individual Liberties and Freedoms, that is, rape and pillage.

But, yes, there are the Spiritual Virtues. The thing to be remembered about the Spiritual Virtues, is that one cannot expect to derive much practical advantage from their cultivation, or at least, practical advantage is not the point of it all. The Spiritual Virtues – abstinence from the Appetites of Lust and Gluttony, and the Impulses of Jealousy and Anger – are exercised so as to make oneself fitting company in Heaven, the Spiritual Realm. The Appetites and the Impulses do indeed have their practical side while we are Incarnate and not really much different from the brute animals doing their utmost to merely survive. But taken out of that context of Mortal Survival, the Appetites and the Impulses become ridiculous.

For instance, sex. Spiritual Beings do not need to copulate. Reproduction is not a concern in the Spiritual Realm. Therefore, Souls are expected to transcend the urge to be poking and wrapping around the other Spiritual Entities. While still Mortal, if a person sees sex as a ‘want’ – an important part of their life definition – then they will take this attitude with them into the Spiritual Realm, where it will be most embarrassing for them. They will be like the Dog at the cocktail party that humps the legs of the guests. Nobody wears a tuxedo to have his leg humped. The most charitable view that can be taken of such behavior is one of bemused disgust. Such dogs are ushered out and not invited back.

So, for this World we should be ‘Civilized’. And in preparation of the Next, we should practice Virtue – making sure we do not want what we merely only need.

For instance, sex. Spiritual Beings do not need to copulate. Reproduction is not a concern in the Spiritual Realm. Therefore, Souls are expected to transcend the urge to be poking and wrapping around the other Spiritual Entities. While still Mortal, if a person sees sex as a ‘want’ – an important part of their life definition – then they will take this attitude with them into the Spiritual Realm, where it will be most embarrassing for them. They will be like the Dog at the cocktail party that humps the legs of the guests. Nobody wears a tuxedo to have his leg humped. The most charitable view that can be taken of such behavior is one of bemused disgust. Such dogs are ushered out and not invited bac





Someone told me there was this discussion between an Imam and a Catholic Priest (I think), and they were talking about marriage. The dialogue went something like this:

Imam: So, you don't get married or have sex?

Priest: No

Imam: Why is that?

Priest: I don't because it's filth, and I want to remain pure.

Imam: So, you don't procreate because it's filth, but it's OK for God to have a son?



Think about that Leo :cool: ....Salaam

For instance, sex. Spiritual Beings do not need to copulate. Reproduction is not a concern in the Spiritual Realm. Therefore, Souls are expected to transcend the urge to be poking and wrapping around the other Spiritual Entities. While still Mortal, if a person sees sex as a ‘want’ – an important part of their life definition – then they will take this attitude with them into the Spiritual Realm, where it will be most embarrassing for them. They will be like the Dog at the cocktail party that humps the legs of the guests. Nobody wears a tuxedo to have his leg humped. The most charitable view that can be taken of such behavior is one of bemused disgust. Such dogs are ushered out and not invited back.

I'm guessing you're thankful your parents didn't feel the same way as you when you were 'created'. :rolleyes: We're not too thankful that your parents did the deed, but I'm guessing you are. How hypocritical of you Leo. Blame all others who do have sex for being sinners, when you yourself are an object of a sexual act. I'm also hoping that you've never accused your mother of being a dog humping the legs of party goers at a cocktail party. :confused:

Reproduction is essential to life Leo. Like all animals, we have sexual and reproductive organs. Maybe you should put the bible and the rosary down and just 'get some'. Might make you sound less like a prat.

Someone told me there was this discussion between an Imam and a Catholic Priest (I think), and they were talking about marriage. The dialogue went something like this:

Imam: So, you don't get married or have sex?
Priest: No
Imam: Why is that?
Priest: I don't because it's filth, and I want to remain pure.
Imam: So, you don't procreate because it's filth, but it's OK for God to have a son?

Interesting how much this story has changed.

Bell's:
did'nt you know, Leo is a product of emaculate conception.
I know, he like's to think so.

Someone told me there was this discussion between an Imam and a Catholic Priest (I think), and they were talking about marriage. The dialogue went something like this:

Imam: So, you don't get married or have sex?

Priest: No

Imam: Why is that?

Priest: I don't because it's filth, and I want to remain pure.

Imam: So, you don't procreate because it's filth, but it's OK for God to have a son?



Think about that Leo :cool: ....Salaam

God has a Son by Divine Creation.

People spawn children through biological copulation.

God's Creation is of the Spiritual Realm. Human Reproduction of of the Animal
Realm.

But such distinction would be difficult for an Iman to understand -- somebody whose only notion of Heavenly Reward consists in getting a bevy of Virgins to deflower. So what Christianity calls Perverts, Islam calls Holy Men.

cool Leo Volont. You're pretty smart.

I never really thought of that. Thanks Leo for giving me something to think of.

Leo we know that's you (faith vanity angel) in a different guise dont be silly.
as only you would say that.

I'm guessing you're thankful your parents didn't feel the same way as you when you were 'created'.

The Sexual Urge is extremely persuasive. Nobody needs to argue for sex, or make little intellectual justifications for sex. There will always be enough sex. So, no, I don't think it is necessary that I be so grateful for having been born. On last count didn't we find that there must be at least 7 Billion People alive on Earth today. Does that make it appear as though we are darn lucky that anybody is being born anymore? Certainly, if my Parents had not had me, some other parents would have.

what we need is more people willing NOT to be parents. Humanity is covering the face of the Earth like a virus. Land, Rivers, Lakes and Oceans are being ******** by our biological and industrial filth. The Atmosphere is being stunk up by our methane. Honestly, I would be thankful if 99% of the World's Population were to curl up and drop dead before they could reproduce themselves. Then maybe Humanity could come into a healthy balance with our environment.

I never really thought of that. Thanks Leo for giving me something to think of.

Why, thank you so very much. Often entire weeks go by without a single word of appreciation, and so I am delighted whenever I am told that I was able to please, inform, or amuse.

Leo we know that's you (faith vanity angel) in a different guise dont be silly.
as only you would say that.

No.

I told you I had my Angels. We must have just heard from one!

you'll get a lot, more now you, and your faith are together.

you'll get a lot, more now you, and your faith are together.

It would be nice to have an ally; however, this isn't my first Forum, and I've discerned a trend -- the Forum Managements tolerate me while they think I am cornered and on the defensive. It is when people begin to join my side that I am banned. The people who spend money to conduct these Propaganda Forums aren't shelling out the Cash so that I can score all the points and undermine their Doctrines and Orthodoxies, whether they be Religious or Quasi-Scientific.

no one's, going to ban you, unless you cause it.

Civilized and barbarism? There isnt much of a difference. A so called Civilized people is a group of humans with the same morals and eithics--therefore a social group. A barbarian can be someone of a social group who opposes this so called veiw of "right" or what u call civilized. It is not about rights and wrongs, its a fight of ideals. It is a war of ideas and how a social group perceives right and wrong. Just becauce a person lives in a expensive house or anything capitalistic does NOT mean they are civilized. Since we live in a society ruled by money we automatically think that anyone who doesnt use or have it is "wrong" and that will be the downfall of the western civilization.

what we need is more people willing NOT to be parents. Humanity is covering the face of the Earth like a virus. Land, Rivers, Lakes and Oceans are being ******** by our biological and industrial filth. The Atmosphere is being stunk up by our methane. Honestly, I would be thankful if 99% of the World's Population were to curl up and drop dead before they could reproduce themselves. Then maybe Humanity could come into a healthy balance with our environment.
And yet here you are Leo, destroying the environment while using electricity to run your computer. And how Christian of you to say that you wished 99% of humanity drop dead before they can reproduce. If you feel so strongly about it, why don't you start petitioning the Catholic Church, of which you are a member, to advocate the use of contraception, especially in some countries in Asia and Africa where the crisis has reached dangerous levels. How can you say what you have said above, yet still belong to a religious institution that tells its followers that contraceptions such as condoms is evil? A tad hypocritical don't you think?

Tell me something Leo. Seeing your stance stated above, do you advocate abortion?

ohh no...not another abortion post!

no one's, going to ban you, unless you cause it.

Statements like that are silly. There is never a due process hearing. One day you go to log on and you can't. Sure, I suppose they always have their reasons, but my Freedom of Speech is never one of them. Usually I can guess that some moron complained that I offended them. And I am always going to do that. Morons need to know they are morons. If I am of any use to the Universe at all it is in disabusing these idiots of their vain selfdelusions of intellectual sufficiency. If they finally understand that they cannot rely upon their own questionable, stunted, and malinformed Judgments, then my job there is done.

Besides, every Forum has only a few regulars. I have no idea how many people might have read my stuff, learned from it, and never replied, but I don't suppose there have been many. After a few months, all the regulars no my opinions and doctrines about as well as I do, and then it is almost necessary to get banned, so that I can move on and indoctrinate the next little group somewhere.

Leo Volont---i would like facts---not opinionated rhetoric.

Tell me something Leo. Seeing your stance stated above, do you advocate abortion?

Have you been following? I DON'T EVEN ADVOCATE SEX.

Abortion is violence after perversion.

Do I think abortion is murder? No. Anyone with alittle Spiritual Education knows that fetuses are not Quickened with Soul until after the 21st Week. So most abortions don't actually hurt anything.

But it is a disgusting idea to inflict violence on a body for the sake of purely recreational sex. It is killing Life to maintain a Slutty Lifestyle.

So while I believe in Freedom of Choice, I would as soon line up women seeking abortions and put the FlameThrower on them -- that is how disgusting I find them. With 7 Billion People jossling for room on this Planet, I think I can still find plenty of Repect for Life, while at the same time asserting that there are some people whose reprehensible conduct make it so that I feel as though they do not deserve to live... at least not without alot of pain and suffering.

Have you been following? I DON'T EVEN ADVOCATE SEX.

Oh I know you don't advocate sex. You find it to be deliciously sinful.

Abortion is violence after perversion.
But it has helped in not increasing the population.

Do I think abortion is murder? No. Anyone with alittle Spiritual Education knows that fetuses are not Quickened with Soul until after the 21st Week. So most abortions don't actually hurt anything.
Ah how refreshing. A religious zealot who does not believe that abortion is murder. What is murder though is this:

I would as soon line up women seeking abortions and put the FlameThrower on them -- that is how disgusting I find them.
How very Marian Catholic Christian of you. You're ok with these women wanting to terminate their pregnancy, but you'd rather kill the woman. Hmmm....

Ah yes, it all comes down to the fact that they had SEX. They committed the ultimate sin by committing the animal act of reproduction. :rolleyes:

With 7 Billion People jossling for room on this Planet, I think I can still find plenty of Repect for Life, while at the same time asserting that there are some people whose reprehensible conduct make it so that I feel as though they do not deserve to live... at least not without alot of pain and suffering.
There's a contradiction in here somewhere.... Ah yes, here it is! You think you can still find plenty of respect for life, but you have no qualms with burning women who have dared have sex and fallen pregnant. :rolleyes:

What the hell, abortion may not be murder but its an excuse. It removes all blame from stupid ass people having unprotected sex. It is a constant capitalist movement in the USA and western world. WHY? becuase doctors get paid. I think that abortion is wrong in soooo many ways. WHy dont people just use rubbers? Are people just like animals? can they not control themselves long enough to slip on a freakin rubber? On top of it all our society deems it OKAY! This inturn creates an attitude of apathy such as "Its okay baby, we can just get it aborted" this is sick and wrong. Why wont people stop being sheep to capitalism and animals to their urges?

But it (abortion) has helped in not increasing the population.




Actually I do not think so. It is an expensive luxury in every society. I couldn't believe that even 1% of the Population has been limited by abortion.

Also, if abortion were not available, other alternatives would be sought which would limit population equally as well.

What the hell, abortion may not be murder but its an excuse. It removes all blame from stupid ass people having unprotected sex. It is a constant capitalist movement in the USA and western world. WHY? becuase doctors get paid. I think that abortion is wrong in soooo many ways. WHy dont people just use rubbers? Are people just like animals? can they not control themselves long enough to slip on a freakin rubber? On top of it all our society deems it OKAY! This inturn creates an attitude of apathy such as "Its okay baby, we can just get it aborted" this is sick and wrong. Why wont people stop being sheep to capitalism and animals to their urges?
I disagree. In many instances abortion is sought because of rape or incest. Or the rubber breaks. Or the mother is ill and her pregnancy will possibly kill her, or there is something wrong with the featus. While yes there are some people who view abortion as a quick fix method, not all do. Plus you have also failed to take into consideration that many US schools are not even teaching children about contraception or the use of condoms.

Viruses and natural events do a good job of limiting population---not that the USA needs it. We have many many many acres of free land--we just choose to me morons and populate a limited space around major cities! Abortion is not an effective population control. Abortion is for the weak and foolish.(for some reason mabye they shouldnt breed) But it is still wrong in many ways. As my thread reads above---its just an excuse for the weak.
-THE PEOPLE ARE SHEEP AND I AM A WOLF!

How very Marian Catholic Christian of you. You're ok with these women wanting to terminate their pregnancy, but you'd rather kill the woman. Hmmm....



Everybody dies. There is no one alive today who was alive one hundred and twenty four years ago. Everyone alive then is dead now. Were they all murdered? People die anyway.

The Fabric of the Universe would not unravel if Stupid Slutty Women were put down for their Abominable and Disgraceful Behavior while they are still in their Prime, rather than waiting another 20 to 40 years for Nature to takes its course. But in the meanwhile, more deserving mouths could eat the food that would have been wasted on the murderous fornicators.

Actually I do not think so. It is an expensive luxury in every society. I couldn't believe that even 1% of the Population has been limited by abortion.

Also, if abortion were not available, other alternatives would be sought which would limit population equally as well.
I agree, it is an expensive luxury if it is not deemed to be a medical emergency in all societies.

We live in a time where the church is advocating for the miseducation of children in regards to contraception. Contraception in many societies is deemed to be evil or unnecessary. In India, women in the poor slums are having up to a dozen or so children because contraception is either too expensive or not available to them. Some face the possibility of death or beatings and abuse if they decide to undergo proceedures that will prevent them from having any more children. If we are to attempt to control the world's population, it is imperitive for the church to change its doctrines and dogma in regards to contraception (for a start). I find the thought of the Catholic Church to be immoral in the world (especially third world countries), because of the way that they continue to preach the non-use of contraception, especially condoms. I agree with you that our resources are dwindling on this planet. But people will continue to have dozens of children if the Church continues the way it has in the past and today.

Viruses and natural events do a good job of limiting population---
True.

Abortion is not an effective population control. Abortion is for the weak and foolish.(for some reason mabye they shouldnt breed) But it is still wrong in many ways. As my thread reads above---its just an excuse for the weak.
That is not always the case though. As I pointed out above, abortion is sometimes sought in cases of rape and incest, or where the mother's life is at stake or where there is something wrong with the featus.

Everybody dies. There is no one alive today who was alive one hundred and twenty four years ago. Everyone alive then is dead now. Were they all murdered? People die anyway.

The Fabric of the Universe would not unravel if Stupid Slutty Women were put down for their Abominable and Disgraceful Behavior while they are still in their Prime, rather than waiting another 20 to 40 years for Nature to takes its course. But in the meanwhile, more deserving mouths could eat the food that would have been wasted on the murderous fornicators.
True, we will all die one day. But I don't condone the thought of murdering women for having sex. Your stance reeks of the same primitive scent used by the Taliban regime. While the fabric of the universe would not unravel if we slaughtered who you deemed to be 'stupid slutty women', the fabric of society would. What kind of society would we become if we followed your stance? Where would we draw the line? Would we get to the point where women in general were 'put down' because they could end up being 'slutty'?

God has a Son by Divine Creation.

People spawn children through biological copulation.

God's Creation is of the Spiritual Realm. Human Reproduction of of the Animal
Realm.

But such distinction would be difficult for an Iman to understand -- somebody whose only notion of Heavenly Reward consists in getting a bevy of Virgins to deflower. So what Christianity calls Perverts, Islam calls Holy Men.



You see Leo this is why your "following" is so small....saying all Iman's are perverts which is a blanket untrue statement with no evidence to back this up.How about your racist comments you made towards blacks and Martin Luthor King? or even Ghandi? You should spend more of your time properly representing your religion instead of trying to put down everyone else's you see for every Iman wanting "virgins" in heaven there are Catholic Priests wanting them here:

1984
The Rev. Gilbert Gauthe of the Lafayette, La., diocese pleads guilty to molesting 11 boys and admits victimizing dozens more. In a widening scandal, 19 other priests are accused of abuse, and the diocese negotiates costly out-of-court settlements with victims.

1985
The Rev. Thomas Doyle, a canon lawyer for the Vatican embassy in Washington, writes a confidential memo for the nation's Catholic bishops citing 30 cases with 100 victims and projecting a cost to the church of $1 billion over 10 years. Also, journalist Jason Berry writes a nationwide survey of the problem for the National Catholic Reporter, drawing the secular media's attention to it.

1989
Hawaii's Joseph Ferrario becomes the first U.S. bishop accused of molestation. A court dismisses the charges because they were filed too late, but Ferrario, who denied the charges, retires early in 1993.

1990
The Rev. Bruce Ritter, celebrated leader of Covenant House for teen runaways, steps down amid a scandal. He denies an accusation of molestation from one youth, but others step forward to accuse him and the Covenant House board reports extensive misconduct. Ritter's Franciscan superiors in Rome approve a transfer to India, but outrage following a news report about the move forces the plan to be scrapped.

1992
The U.S. bishops take their first major collective action, endorsing a set of principles for handling cases. At the same time, Berry's history of the scandals, "Lead Us Not Into Temptation," estimates 400 priests have been accused, costing the church some $400 million.

1994
The growing victims' rights movement suffers a credibility setback when Steven Cook recants his sensational claim that Chicago's Cardinal Joseph Bernardin had molested him. Bernardin's former archdiocese in Cincinnati paid a settlement to Cook over a seminary teacher's abuse

1997
A Dallas jury hears charges from 11 victims of ex-priest Rudy Kos and returns a $120-million verdict. The award was later cut to about $30 million, but the diocese needs to take out mortgages and sell property to cover the judgment.

1999
Bishop J. Keith Symons of Palm Beach, Fla., becomes the first U.S. bishop to resign after admitting molestation. That scandal was greatly compounded in 2002 when Bishop Anthony O'Connell, the successor Rome appointed to clean house, resigns for the identical reason.

2000
The Rev. Andrew Greeley, an author and sociologist, writes an introduction for a new edition of Berry's history. The sex abuse situation, he contends, "may be the greatest scandal in the history of religion in America and perhaps the most serious crisis Catholicism has faced since the Reformation."

Jan. 18, 2002
Defrocked Boston priest John Geoghan, 66, is convicted of indecent assault and battery as a priest sex scandal in the archdiocese widens. Geoghan, 66, has been accused of abusing 130 children while he was actively serving as a priest in the Archdiocese of Boston over a 30-year period. He faces more criminal and civil suits.

Feb. 21, 2002
Geoghan is sentenced to 9-10 years in prison as the archdiocese continues to reel from the scandal. The extent of the cover-up and the sheer number of priests involved has shocked Boston's large Catholic community, leading to calls for Cardinal Bernard Law to step down. Meanwhile, new cases are being reported in several other state


etc etc etc.......

good post surenderer.
unfortunately no matter how, you prove this man wrong.
he think's if he insult's you, he's won, the man's a moron.

Leo Volont: I couldn't believe that even 1% of the Population has been limited by abortion.

Also, if abortion were not available, other alternatives would be sought which would limit population equally as well.
*************
M*W: Abortion has been used since the human race began. In the ancient times there were herbs and other plants used as abortificants like Blue Cohosh and Black Cohosh, Pennyroyal, Red Clover, and others....

In the ancient cavarans traveling across the deserts, nomads would place fruit pits into the uteri of their camels to prevent them from becoming pregnant. The pits acted like an IUD contraceptive.

Midwives in the ancient days of the Picts and Celts used seaweed to open the cervix to remove a fetus well into pregnancy. Seaweed is STILL USED TODAY to cause abortion.

Throughout history men proved they couldn't be trusted to use coitus interruptus as contraception. Therefore, women had to take matters into their own hands by using certain flowers, leaves, roots, twigs, butcher's knives, coathangers, chemicals and suction devices, to prevent or to abort unwanted children.

The only thing I want to know is, how did you end up being a live birth?

Leo Volont---i would like facts---not opinionated rhetoric.

You want facts and you spend your time surfing the Net!?

If you have a problem with opiniated rhetoric then simply don't read any more Leo Volonts. But some people find it amusing.

Much Writing and Commentory assumes that people share a common stock of knowledge. People are not all little babies in school -- it is understood that people are minimally educated. The FACTS are not in dispute. It is how the facts are understood.

By demanding facts you are admitting that you are in want of an education. I'm writing for people who already know the facts.

The only thing I want to know is, how did you end up being a live birth?

Yes, after listening to your seminar about what murderous sluts Women Throughout History were, I wonder that any of us survived.

Leo, that was disgusting. You dare preach on and on about being a Marian Catholic but you can then dare state that women were murderous sluts? Your hypocrisy is appalling. I for one don't know what comes after death, but somehow, I doubt that if there is something after death, your experience wont be too pleasant if it is judged on one's beliefs and attitudes and thoughts. You denigrate women as being sluts for having sex and call them murderers if they have an abortion, yet you don't think that abortion is murder. How could you say such a thing when you yourself have a daughter. It is people such as you who are bringing down the Catholic Church and Christianity in general, and further on, you bring down humanity as a whole. Frankly, I am glad to be an agnostic and to have left the Catholic Church, because the thought that I might have been associated as belonging to the same religion as you is sickening.

We live in a time where the church is advocating for the miseducation of children in regards to contraception. Contraception in many societies is deemed to be evil or unnecessary. In India, women in the poor slums are having up to a dozen or so children because contraception is either too expensive or not available to them. Some face the possibility of death or beatings and abuse if they decide to undergo proceedures that will prevent them from having any more children. If we are to attempt to control the world's population, it is imperitive for the church to change its doctrines and dogma in regards to contraception (for a start). I find the thought of the Catholic Church to be immoral in the world (especially third world countries), because of the way that they continue to preach the non-use of contraception, especially condoms. I agree with you that our resources are dwindling on this planet. But people will continue to have dozens of children if the Church continues the way it has in the past and today.

Yes, the Church has been misguided. Again, it sources out of Pauline Doctrine. Where Christ dismissed sexuality as merely trivial, Paul spoke at length about Spiritual Completion through Copulation. Later, embarrassed by such a Carnal Teaching, the Church Fathers had to find a rational justification for it somewhere, somehow. So forward came the Doctrine of Flooding the Earth with Children.

The Right Way of Looking at Sex and Child Bearing is that it is Unimportant. Those who are Aspiring to the Spiritual will find Sexuality an impediment. The sooner they get over it, the better.

It becomes Ridiculous then for the Church to Advocate Sex (simply because paul did).

Someday the Church will learn. In the 19th Century a Catholic Visionary, Father Bosco, prophesized that the Church would be Fighting Off Thousands of Enemies, and would be LOSING Big Time! Then a New Pope would rise up immediately in the tracks of a freshly dead Pope (killed in the Battle), and rather than persist against the Thousand Enemies, the New Pope would pull back and decide strategically to only emphasize 2 Things: the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, and Marian Doctrine. Abandoning all the factitious side issues, would make many of the old enemies into New Friends. The only Remaining Enemies would seem weak beside the Stronger Alliances made by the New Church.

The Next Pope will not persist in the Silly Doctrine that the Church somehow favors Copulation. Whether or not people use Contraception might be an issue for the Confessional, but it will not effect People's Right to Church Membership or Access to the Holy Sacraments.

Bells(quote)
It is people such as you who are bringing down the Catholic Church and Christianity in general, and further on, you bring down humanity as a whole. Frankly, I am glad to be an agnostic and to have left the Catholic Church, because the thought that I might have been associated as belonging to the same religion as you is sickening
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
hahahahaha
bells bells bells again at it with ass
moderators dont ban bells, we need him to show us ass here

Philosopher Philocrazy

Leo, that was disgusting. You dare preach on and on about being a Marian Catholic but you can then dare state that women were murderous sluts? .

Go back and read her seminar on how murderous sluts abort their infants for mere convenience.

My point stands. Considering her viewpoint that it is so terribly uncomfortable for women to have babies, and how many ways they have devised to murder their infants, it is truly Wonderful that the Vampires have allowed any of us to survive.

Philo, do you seriously have nothing better to do with your time? Are you pathetically stalking me or something now? If you have nothing constructive to say little one, it is best to say nothing at all, lest you make a fool of yourself. And you are constantly doing so. For someone who attempts to tell people that he's a philosopher, you are merely making yourself out to be a silly little gnat with no intelligence whatsoever. Now go and play outside little boy, preferably in some traffic.

leo, where's your faith angel today, will she be coming on later, perhap when you've finished.

yes Bells what did you say?
ass?
ok bells go on show us

Philosopher Philocrazy

Go back and read her seminar on how murderous sluts abort their infants for mere convenience.

My point stands. Considering her viewpoint that it is so terribly uncomfortable for women to have babies, and how many ways they have devised to murder their infants, it is truly Wonderful that the Vampires have allowed any of us to survive.
How do you know it is for mere convenience. Abortions have existed for longer than man can remember. The sad fact of the matter is that with the Church's stance on abortion and contraception, some women are still having to resort to the same primitive practices that MW has mentioned because there are no family planning clinics available. Some women in third world countries who have more babies than they can feed because they don't have access to contraception (thanks to the church) actually resort to such methods Leo, so that at least some of their children can survive.

It is not merely uncomfortable to have a child Leo, it's painful and at times so dangerous that it's deadly. I know of one woman who is such a strict Catholic that she and her husband refuse to use any form of contraception. She has just had her 5th child and ended up in intensive care when her heart stopped during child birth. She was told not to have any more children after her first because it was too dangerous, but the rhythm method proved ineffective, and since that is the only method approved by the church, that was all they used. She didn't believe in abortion, again because of the church's stance on it. The damage was so extensive after the 5th child that they performed a hystorectomy while she was still under. Her husband had to be forced to sign the consent papers because he still believed that such a stance was against the Church's teachings. You'd probably say that at least she didn't commit murder. :rolleyes: Frankly Leo, your stance on women is scary. You say nothing of the men who had sex with these women for them to fall pregnant in the first place, absolving them of all blame and responsibility, resulting in some of these women having to resort to possible deadly forms of abortion because they could not feed or support their child.

And vampires? Oh please tell me you don't believe in vampires as well... :eek:

hi miss t
dont you have to do your bed, after filling up
cause you sound very philosophical with that filling on your tooth
next time pick on philocrazy, so we can crack a few jokes about yourself
like you questioning my philosophy for example

Philosopher Philocrazy

yes Bells what did you say?
ass?
ok bells go on show us

Philosopher Philocrazy
What happened little boy? Did the truck miss you? Go back and play with your little cars on the road, I'm sure it wont miss next time. Now, I shall say again child, if you have nothing to add to this discussion or any other discussion, don't type.

leo, where's your faith angel today, will she be coming on later, perhap when you've finished.

What, are you accusing me of knowing how to open up more than one account? Can you do that? I know that if you are banned, then it is your Computer that gets banned, no matter what your 'Name' is... at least I think so.

Anyway, if you think that "Angel" is me, then pay close attention to her writing style.... and mine. When I really get going with my writing I use alot of the Future and Past Suppositional Tenses. Most people use the easier tenses and don't know how to reconcile the verbs in the more complicated tenses. I use the complicated tenses because they make me sound more pompous -- that is, better educated. Anyway, I doubt if Angel would be able to keep up. But supposing Angel is actually myself, it can only be supposed that I could not but slip into my accustomed verbose writing style.

It reminds me of what Oliver Goldsmith said of Samuel Johnson's fiction style -- that all his characters sounded alike... "That even his little fish come out sounding like Whales".

I don't think you will ever catch "Angel" sounding like a Whale.

No, I don't think faith angel is Leo. Completely different writing style.

bells you got it right,well done.
show some respect, be an ass


Philosopher philocrazy

In India, women in the poor slums are having up to a dozen or so children because contraception is either too expensive or not available to them. Some face the possibility of death or beatings and abuse if they decide to undergo proceedures that will prevent them from having any more children. If we are to attempt to control the world's population, it is imperitive for the church to change its doctrines and dogma in regards to contraception (for a start). I find the thought of the Catholic Church to be immoral in the world (especially third world countries), because of the way that they continue to preach the non-use of contraception, especially condoms. I agree with you that our resources are dwindling on this planet. But people will continue to have dozens of children if the Church continues the way it has in the past and today.

Why, Bells? The way you're posing this argument that the resources children spend are worth more than the children. Ultimately, it's not resources that will destroy; it's greed. The United States alone is producing enough food to fill the entire world's population, and we have not even begun to produce food in the oceans.


Do I think abortion is murder? No. Anyone with alittle Spiritual Education knows that fetuses are not Quickened with Soul until after the 21st Week. So most abortions don't actually hurt anything.

This is untrue, Leo. The quickning of the soul is based upon greek philosophy, and some early catholic theologians used this. We now know that at conception there is a living human being.

Why, Bells? The way you're posing this argument that the resources children spend are worth more than the children. Ultimately, it's not resources that will destroy; it's greed. The United States alone is producing enough food to fill the entire world's population, and we have not even begun to produce food in the oceans.

On the contrary Okinrus, I agree with you totally. It is greed that has a large hand in allowing people to starve in third world countries and families and women are finding themselves in positions where they may be forced to have abortions. Drug companies in the West have ensured that contraception is too expensive. The church has ensured that these people believe it is a sin. The West and its greed have also ensured that third world countries are forced to repay debts which they cannot pay, thereby having to resort on food aid that is not enough to feed the starving. We have the resources to help the third world countries but we do not. Instead our governments are killing others in a bid to attain even more wealth, to the detriment of the poor and the starving.

This is untrue, Leo. The quickning of the soul is based upon greek philosophy, and some early catholic theologians used this. We now know that at conception there is a living human being.

"Living". A frog is "living". So what?

I am talking about the Quickening in the Body of an Advanced Spiritual Soul. Until about the 21st Week a Fetus is 'alive' but does not possess a Spiritual Soul.

It is a suspicion of mine that some Fetuses never are quickened. From Conception, through birth to physical maturity, some people are never given a Soul. How do we recognize such people? An absence of Moral Reflection. They have perceptions and reactions and they can develop habitual behaviors and routines, but never seem to have a Conscious Selfawareness. You look them in the eyes and nothing really looks back. The 'Windows to the Soul' are simply vacant.

Drug companies in the West have ensured that contraception is too expensive.

Well, the pill can have some very harmful effects, and I don't think these drugs are really safe to be used unless if there is proper medical personel.


The church has ensured that these people believe it is a sin.

First, I don't think you believe in sin, at least the conventual meaning. Thus, it seems kind of pointless to argue whether contraception is a sin, because you do not believe anything is sin. Second, you're also suggesting that the Church should have a double standard. In some of these countries, this is their tradition and culture. These people like large families. It would be like trying to feed poor muslims a surplus stock of pork simply because we believe pork is healthy. Sure, I don't see any sin in eating pork, but I also respect Islam's devotion, that for them, abstaining from pork to be a sign of their love to God. So I don't see why that should be any different than with catholics. After all, it's not the third world population that's mining and depleting the world resources.

Dear Okinirus,

It is not my intent to minimize Sin; however, practically speaking, everything that has to do with biological existence is a 'sin'. Even where the Doctrines of the Bishops encourage it -- as in the Copulations of Marriage; then we have the Mystical Church show its actual disapproval by its favor of the institutions of Celibacy.

And why should practically everything be a Sin? Well, the Church is a Spiritual Institution. It aims for Life in Heaven, in the Spirit, ultimately. By making every Worldly Act a subject for Confession, it gives opportunity to every Catholic's Spiritual Confessor, The Priest, to discuss Spirituality. While acknowledging that Biological Life and the contingencies of the Flesh have their influence, the Priest exhorts the Catholic to remember the Spiritual Perspective.

Most sins are waived off with Penance -- the saying of a number of Prayers, usually. But the Church does have a list of unforgivable Sins. Anybody stupid enough to get married in the Church cannot divorce and then ever again take Holy Communion. The Bishops who decided this should of course be shot. Christ would be appalled that the Vicars of Christ withhold His Grace over such a trivial thing as sexual relations. Christ dismissed the importance of Sex by saying there would be no sex in Heaven. It was only paul who glorified Copulation and brought Fornication up to God's Altar. If I were the Next Pope I would toss out both the Canonization of Paul and the Institution of Marriage. Sex is NEVER Holy.

Well, the pill can have some very harmful effects, and I don't think these drugs are really safe to be used unless if there is proper medical personel.

Yes, the pill should only be prescribed with medical supervision. However other forms of contraception do not need such forms of supervision. The condom, for example, would be an ideal form of contraception, yet the Church continues to oppose it, because it, along with other artificial contraception, "breaks the link between sex and procreation". They even oppose its use in countries where AIDS has become rampant, bringing out false stories about how condoms cannot stop the AIDS virus.

In Lwak, near Lake Victoria, the director of an Aids testing centre says he cannot distribute condoms because of church opposition. Gordon Wambi told the programme: "Some priests have even been saying that condoms are laced with HIV/Aids."

Panorama found the claims about permeable condoms repeated by Catholics as far apart as Asia and Latin America.
link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,7369,1059068,00.html)

Now where is the morality in this?

I guess it all stems from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).
link (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#2399)


First, I don't think you believe in sin, at least the conventual meaning. Thus, it seems kind of pointless to argue whether contraception is a sin, because you do not believe anything is sin. Second, you're also suggesting that the Church should have a double standard. In some of these countries, this is their tradition and culture. These people like large families. It would be like trying to feed poor muslims a surplus stock of pork simply because we believe pork is healthy. Sure, I don't see any sin in eating pork, but I also respect Islam's devotion, that for them, abstaining from pork to be a sign of their love to God. So I don't see why that should be any different than with catholics. After all, it's not the third world population that's mining and depleting the world resources.
So I can't state the Church's attitude in regards to contraception because I am agnostic? Please okinrus, I was brought up in the Catholic Church and know enough about their doctrines to know that their doctrines in regards to artificial contraception is morally reprehensible.

I understand that in many cultures, large families are the norm and wanted. However, in situations where the distribution of condoms mean not only birth control, but a matter between life and death, the Church should not be setting such standards. I was not talking about Muslim countries, but countries where the Church has so much power and influence that the people are simply not given the choice to use birth control even if they want to.

The impact of the Church’s views extends even beyond its one billion members. The Holy See (the government of the Catholic Church) is the only religious entity that has non-member state permanent observer status at the United Nations. In contrast to all other religions, the Holy See has active participatory and special voting privileges at UN conferences and meetings. This status gives the Church leadership enormous leverage in shaping international human rights standards, international law and public policies that have a tremendous impact on people around the world, especially women.

The Holy See works hard to influence reproductive health policies: At the 1995 Beijing Conference on Women, the Church lobbied against advances made in women’s control of their sexuality and fertility; in 1999, it blocked efforts to include emergency contraception in international policy guidelines; and later that year, the Holy See attacked the UN Foundation for Population Activities for distributing emergency contraception to Kosovar refugees who had been raped. The Holy See regularly makes alliances with governments such as the United States, Pakistan, Nicaragua and Sudan and that seek to deny women their sexual and reproductive rights.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Even in many non-Catholic countries, the Church hierarchy has a stranglehold on national health policy because it supports a vast network of humanitarian relief programs on which poor governments depend. As Ms. Magazine has written, “the poorer the country, the greater the Vatican’s influence.”14 The Catholic Church funds more than 300,000 health facilities worldwide and has made clear that it would withdraw its support if those facilities were to offer condoms to men who are HIV positive or provide abortion services to their patients.
link (http://www.madre.org/art_whSickWorld.html)

I'd suggest you read through that last article okinrus.

Bells, even the Church *wanted* to support distributing condoms and abortion, the nuns and aidworkers who are catholic and do the actual work on this would revolt because they believe it's sinful. Why should the Church support something it doesn't even believe, that it knows is harmful?


Now where is the morality in this?

Married couples can plan out their children using the rhythm method.


So I can't state the Church's attitude in regards to contraception because I am agnostic? Please okinrus, I was brought up in the Catholic Church and know enough about their doctrines to know that their doctrines in regards to artificial contraception is morally reprehensible.

I don't see how you can make any comment that their morally reprehensible. The Church determines what is spiritually wrong, not by physical consequence alone. Hence, there will always be issues that you believe do not have a bad physical consequence but do have a bad spiritual one.


I understand that in many cultures, large families are the norm and wanted. However, in situations where the distribution of condoms mean not only birth control, but a matter between life and death

There's never a situation where distributing condoms is a matter between life and death. If people stayed in monogamous relationships, they would not have this problem.


the Church should not be setting such standards. I was not talking about Muslim countries, but countries where the Church has so much power and influence that the people are simply not given the choice to use birth control even if they want to.

The Church has power and influence in these countries because the church does the health programs.

It is not my intent to minimize Sin; however, practically speaking, everything that has to do with biological existence is a 'sin'. Even where the Doctrines of the Bishops encourage it -- as in the Copulations of Marriage; then we have the Mystical Church show its actual disapproval by its favor of the institutions of Celibacy.

Leo, this is very a bad interpretation. Haven't you've heard, "it's not good that man should live alone."


Most sins are waived off with Penance -- the saying of a number of Prayers, usually. But the Church does have a list of unforgivable Sins.

There's only one unforgivable sin.


Anybody stupid enough to get married in the Church cannot divorce and then ever again take Holy Communion. The Bishops who decided this should of course be shot.

I think an annulment is possibile, though I've heard cases where the paperwork and approval take quite a long time.

Leo Volont: It is a suspicion of mine that some Fetuses never are quickened. From Conception, through birth to physical maturity, some people are never given a Soul. How do we recognize such people? An absence of Moral Reflection. They have perceptions and reactions and they can develop habitual behaviors and routines, but never seem to have a Conscious Selfawareness. You look them in the eyes and nothing really looks back. The 'Windows to the Soul' are simply vacant.
*************
M*W: Like you said, yourself, "It is a suspicion of MINE...". No soul, no life. It is impossible to be alive and have no "soul." Explain YOUR concept of the word "soul." Recognizing people who APPEAR to have no soul are people with psychological abnormalities like depression. They often have blank stares even though they are able to go through their daily routines and, sometimes, become quite successful.

You're judging again. Your old Messiah Complex is showing. Go talk to your angels. I hear them calling you... they say... "Mary, your blessed mother, is waiting for you to free her from her virginity."

Leo Volont: It is not my intent to minimize Sin; however, practically speaking, everything that has to do with biological existence is a 'sin'.
*************
M*W: Now you're sounding like the Messiah again! Shut the fuck up!
*************
Leo Volont: Even where the Doctrines of the Bishops encourage it -- as in the Copulations of Marriage; then we have the Mystical Church show its actual disapproval by its favor of the institutions of Celibacy.
*************
M*W: Celibacy was instituted as a means for the RCC to accumulate the estates of the priests. Nothing more. Of course, the catechism doesn't teach this little tidbit.
*************
Leo Volont: And why should practically everything be a Sin? Well, the Church is a Spiritual Institution. It aims for Life in Heaven, in the Spirit, ultimately. By making every Worldly Act a subject for Confession, it gives opportunity to every Catholic's Spiritual Confessor, The Priest, to discuss Spirituality.
*************
M*W: The church made everything a sin so it could collect more money and property from ignorant peasants whose guilt it shamed.
*************
Leo Volont: While acknowledging that Biological Life and the contingencies of the Flesh have their influence, the Priest exhorts the Catholic to remember the Spiritual Perspective.
*************
M*W: How much money was spiritual perspective worth in those days?
*************
Leo Volont: Most sins are waived off with Penance -- the saying of a number of Prayers, usually. But the Church does have a list of unforgivable Sins. Anybody stupid enough to get married in the Church cannot divorce and then ever again take Holy Communion.
*************
M*W: You are a liar, Leo! I did my share of penance of three Hail Mary's when I was a good catholic... but "unforgiveable sins?" There is NO SUCH THING! Every sin had its affordable price. I was stupid to get married "in the church," but not because of the RCC but to the "righteous" catholic I married. It was my priest who advised me to get a civil divorce to get away from my "righteous" catholic husband, and he never ceased to give me Holy Communion! So you lie again! I received total dispensation from the church with little effort or expense on my part. I was told that I would never be excommunicated as a catholic because I did nothing to sacrifice my marriage sacrament, my husband did. They labeled him an apostate! He was excommunicated... until he moved to a far away parish and continued to live the lie even though he had a child out of wedlock (while we were still married), and he then married a divorced woman of ill repute, and they were all taking communion! So, clarify for me all your "unforgiveable sins." I could go further into the disgusting details of his life and perversions which were not only condoned but sanctified by the church, (he was president of the parish council, lector, deacon, child predator, etc.), but I won't. To this day, he continues to be the "righteous" catholic he always was, and he continues to receive communion. Where do the lies ever end?
*************
Leo Volont: Christ would be appalled that the Vicars of Christ withhold His Grace over such a trivial thing as sexual relations. Christ dismissed the importance of Sex by saying there would be no sex in Heaven.
*************
M*W: Of course there is no sexual relations in "heaven." Heaven is a spiritual place only -- the mortal body doesn't enter heaven.
*************
Leo Volont: It was only paul who glorified Copulation and brought Fornication up to God's Altar.
*************
M*W: Paul didn't "glorify copulation!" He was a misogynist just like you! He was a homosexual and had sex with his lover Timothy. There is a former thread on this topic.
*************
Leo Volont: If I were the Next Pope I would toss out both the Canonization of Paul and the Institution of Marriage. Sex is NEVER Holy.
*************
M*W: Well, Leo, you're not gonna be the next pope, so don't hold your breath. Paul is the antichrist, but don't tell the xians. Marriage is a personal matter and not a matter for the church to decide. If it weren't for sex, none of us would be here. Sex is good, it is healthy, it is a gift of our humanity. If sex were a sin, then we wouldn't even exist. If sex didn't exist, then I'd be outta work. You need to do some reading into the ancient Essenes and their sex practices (also an older thread). Sex in the truest sense of the word is a godly power. It's perpetuates the spirituality of the individuals who participate in it with love. After all, love is the greatest gift of all. A gift that you surely don't have.

Married couples can plan out their children using the rhythm method.




The Church's position became Morally Bankrupt as soon as they began advocating the Rhythm Method. It surrendered to the Notion that Sex is an acceptable Form of Recreation. After conceding Recreational Sex then why does it matter what form of Contraception is used?

If the Bishops are going to admit they have been wrong, then why do it in mere halfsteps?

The Church's Position should be that Sex and Contraception are Venial Sins.

Leo, this is very a bad interpretation. Haven't you've heard, "it's not good that man should live alone."



Indeed, I like Hillary Rodham Clinton's book, "It Takes a Village". Men can live in Society. Priests can live in Society.

But the proof is everywhere that it is Unhealthy for Men to Roomate with Women. Men and Women, even when sexually active, should Live in separate Apartments. Women nag. They can't seem to help themselves. When they are together they cluck like chickens and apparently do not listen to each others cattiness. But men, who talk far less to each other, think that conversation must certainly mean something, and are soon overloaded by the useless talk of Females, as they try to discern Meaning where there usually isn't any. Frustration is released as Violence.

Men should live in peace and quiet, that is, men should have a separate abode where they can go to rest and recoup.

As for Celibacy. Is it not better to have fewer appetites than more. It is Liberating to no longer require Copulation. Most men identify with their sexuality, but do not stop to consider how much they must demean their Masculine Dignity in order to 'suck up to' Women. They should consider how happy they would be if, by shedding this Appetite, they could make themselves Free to Sneer at the wiles of the Fairer Sex.

I think an annulment is possibile, though I've heard cases where the paperwork and approval take quite a long time.

Marriages outside of the Church are instantly annulable. But for a Marriage within the Church, if everyone involved isn't willing to repeatedly lie on a stack of Bibles about having never ever had Sex, even when there have been Children involved, then the Church will find no grounds for Legal Annulment and the Man and Woman involved will never again be eligible to take the Holy Sacrament.

It honestly makes me shudder how Bishops of The Church can dare to cut off the Nurishment of Christ for something as trivial as Sex. There is a reason these Bishops wear Black. They are Bishops to the Antichristical Church of Paul.

Dear Medicine Woman,

I wonder sometimes that it seems that women are the most adept at flinging the worst insults into Our Lady the Blessed Virgines Face.

Are you familiar with the Prophecy of Simeon (Luke 2:35), the sense of which is that by Stabbing the Heart of Mary with the Sword of Insult, you lay bare your own Evil.

As nice as you may wish to show yourself, otherwise, we now know that you are contemptably Evil.

The Church's position became Morally Bankrupt as soon as they began advocating the Rhythm Method. It surrendered to the Notion that Sex is an acceptable Form of Recreation. After conceding Recreational Sex then why does it matter what form of Contraception is used?

It could be sinful, depending on the intentions of the couple, but spacing out the children born doesn't seem to be a bad thing.


But the proof is everywhere that it is Unhealthy for Men to Roomate with Women. Men and Women, even when sexually active, should Live in separate Apartments. Women nag. They can't seem to help themselves. When they are together they cluck like chickens and apparently do not listen to each others cattiness. But men, who talk far less to each other, think that conversation must certainly mean something, and are soon overloaded by the useless talk of Females, as they try to discern Meaning where there usually isn't any. Frustration is released as Violence.

I knew there was a reason why some men are more violent.

But the proof is everywhere that it is Unhealthy for Men to Roomate with Women. Men and Women, even when sexually active, should Live in separate Apartments. Women nag. They can't seem to help themselves. When they are together they cluck like chickens and apparently do not listen to each others cattiness. But men, who talk far less to each other, think that conversation must certainly mean something, and are soon overloaded by the useless talk of Females, as they try to discern Meaning where there usually isn't any. Frustration is released as Violence.

That's good Leo. Free men of all blame for the abuse that some men commit on their wives. Hell the women deserved it. They "nag". You've solved the age old problem of spousal abuse. You really should publish Leo. You're a hero to all the women bashing men out there in the world.

Your hatred of women is quite disgusting. Especially when viewed in light of your love for Mary.

Men should live in peace and quiet, that is, men should have a separate abode where they can go to rest and recoup.
And women should be allowed to live in peace without fear of abuse from men who have the same attitude as you do.

As for Celibacy. Is it not better to have fewer appetites than more. It is Liberating to no longer require Copulation. Most men identify with their sexuality, but do not stop to consider how much they must demean their Masculine Dignity in order to 'suck up to' Women. They should consider how happy they would be if, by shedding this Appetite, they could make themselves Free to Sneer at the wiles of the Fairer Sex.
How repulsive. You really do have a hatred for women don't you? Yet you can pray to and glorify a woman? The hypocrisy would be amusing if it wasn't so repulsive.

Bells, even the Church *wanted* to support distributing condoms and abortion, the nuns and aidworkers who are catholic and do the actual work on this would revolt because they believe it's sinful. Why should the Church support something it doesn't even believe, that it knows is harmful?
I'm assuming there's an 'if' missing somewhere there. But if the Church did change its stance on the use of condoms okinrus, the amount of lives it would save.... that would far outweigh the moral arguments they have used as their religious dogma. The aidworkers and the nuns who work there on the ground where the use of condoms is seen as necessary would probably be glad if the Church took such a stance. It would result in less babies becoming orphans and being born with AIDS for a start.

Married couples can plan out their children using the rhythm method.
Yes it can, but it is one of the least successful means of contraception. Not to mention that the rhythm method does not prevent STD's.

There's never a situation where distributing condoms is a matter between life and death. If people stayed in monogamous relationships, they would not have this problem.
Yes there is okinrus. People do not stay in monogamous relationships and by taking the stand that the Church has taken, they are not only punishing the adulterers, but also their innocent spouses and children, because it is they who suffer.

The Church has power and influence in these countries because the church does the health programs.
Yes but at what cost? I'm not discounting the fact that the Church does a lot for people in these countries through their health programs. But it could do so much more. Instead of blackmailing countries who may want to educate and distribute condoms, telling them that the aid will stop if they did, so much more could be done.